Do You Think This Could Be True?

[chatanga1]

The ‘dalit reinterpretation’ of the eighteenth century argues in detail how the rising power of Bir Singh Ranghreta who had become an influential commander was put a stop to by the treachery of the Jatt commanders. According to Naranjan Arfi the Sikhs had succeeded in establishing their independence by early 1760s and some of the commanders aspired for their individual rules in different parts, which Bir Singh was opposed to. Bir Singh insisted following Guru’s injunction that the power shall lie in the Panth (the Khalsa collectivity).

Charat Singh, father of Ranjit Singh and Baba Aala Singh, founder of Patiala State, hatched a conspiracy to invite Bir Singh from Peshawar to Amritsar, treacherously disarmed Bir Singh’s soldiers that they should not pay obeisance at the Darbar Sahib (Golden Temple) with arms and then slaughtering them inside the sacred place in batches of five in which they were advised to move. They also wounded Bir Singh in such a way that taken as dead, his body was put in a wooden box and thrown into river Beas. Thereafter Mazbhis were not allowed any commanding position but their military prowess was used under different Misals as subordinates.

[Mithar]

The ‘dalit reinterpretation’ of the eighteenth century argues in detail how the rising power of Bir Singh Ranghreta who had become an influential commander was put a stop to by the treachery of the Jatt commanders. According to Naranjan Arfi the Sikhs had succeeded in establishing their independence by early 1760s and some of the commanders aspired for their individual rules in different parts, which Bir Singh was opposed to. Bir Singh insisted following Guru’s injunction that the power shall lie in the Panth (the Khalsa collectivity).

Charat Singh, father of Ranjit Singh and Baba Aala Singh, founder of Patiala State, hatched a conspiracy to invite Bir Singh from Peshawar to Amritsar, treacherously disarmed Bir Singh’s soldiers that they should not pay obeisance at the Darbar Sahib (Golden Temple) with arms and then slaughtering them inside the sacred place in batches of five in which they were advised to move. They also wounded Bir Singh in such a way that taken as dead, his body was put in a wooden box and thrown into river Beas. Thereafter Mazbhis were not allowed any commanding position but their military prowess was used under different Misals as subordinates.

LIES!!!

[backward]

This is interesting, I wonder if it is true. We can't say they are lies...it seems like 1-off events ended up shaping history for sikhs and this could be the whole reason for the 4th pauri argument...

[dalsingh101]

Something shifty happened with caste during this period. We have clear references to so-called low caste military contributions in Persian manuscripts and later Gurmukhi sources but by the late 1700s, no lower caste has benefited like other castes members. At least one Euro source states that lower castes were again seen with contempt by the time of M. Ranjit Singh's reign.

Tradition says Singhs left a belonging to designate their sardarship over a town/pind in the kusmaan of the early 1700s. It wasn't exactly hard for a so called low caste to do this.

It isn't worth denying discrimination like some sort of closet nazi folks, casteism is an ugly feature of the panth even today, whether we admit it or not. Pretending otherwise is like a goray saying racism doesn't exist. Playing it down only helps perpetuate it.

What is the source of the above quote anyway?

Edited April 19, 2010 by dalsingh101

[chatanga1]

http://punjabpanorama.blogspot.com/2009/06/dalits-and-emancipatory-sikh-religion.html

[shaheediyan]

I have heard this exact story before from different sources.

[Guest zulu]

The ‘dalit reinterpretation’ of the eighteenth century argues in detail how the rising power of Bir Singh Ranghreta who had become an influential commander was put a stop to by the treachery of the Jatt commanders. According to Naranjan Arfi the Sikhs had succeeded in establishing their independence by early 1760s and some of the commanders aspired for their individual rules in different parts, which Bir Singh was opposed to. Bir Singh insisted following Guru’s injunction that the power shall lie in the Panth (the Khalsa collectivity).

Charat Singh, father of Ranjit Singh and Baba Aala Singh, founder of Patiala State, hatched a conspiracy to invite Bir Singh from Peshawar to Amritsar, treacherously disarmed Bir Singh’s soldiers that they should not pay obeisance at the Darbar Sahib (Golden Temple) with arms and then slaughtering them inside the sacred place in batches of five in which they were advised to move. They also wounded Bir Singh in such a way that taken as dead, his body was put in a wooden box and thrown into river Beas. Thereafter Mazbhis were not allowed any commanding position but their military prowess was used under different Misals as subordinates.

I have heard this before a few times....

[dalsingh101]

There's another story I heard about a low caste being hung because he had langar with others and didn't tell them. I was told it was in Chibber's work.

[tonyhp32]

This story was mainly perpetuated by a writer (i forget his name) in the magazine Des Punjab in the late 90s. The story fails on many levels. Firstly Charat Singh was a Misldar in the Gujranwala area whilst Ala Singh was Raja of Patiala. Charhat Singh never had any territory beyond the Beas and Ala Singh had no territory north of the Satluj. As it seems that the main reason for doing away with Bir Singh seems to be the latter's opposition to Misladar taking personal power, Ala Singh would never have been bothered about anyones opposition to his rule. He used the Khalsa when it suited him and he betrayed them when it was in his interests to do so. The names of Ala Singh and Charta Singh seem to have been chosen so as to give a tinge of a conspiracy at a very high level. If Charhat Singh and Ala Singh were busy killing Bir Singh's followers in the Durbar Sahib what were the other Misldars doing? Given that there was a great deal of mutual jealousy between Misldars, the enemies of both Charhat Singh and Ala Singh would have used the event especially of Sikhs murdering Sikhs in Durbar Sahib as a means to unseat them. Bir Singh could never have been in Peshawar at that time as it was under Afghan control although I do believe that a Misldar called Milkha Singh was active and quite successful against the Muslim tribes around Rawalpindi. It seems like a made up story to defame 'dem evil jats'

[dalsingh101]

Tony, 'dem evil jats' are doing quite a lot today in the pinds today to defame themselves.

You seem pretty pro-caste, my question is how much does that influence what you accept to be true or not - not only historically but socially today?

Sometimes Jat brothers remind me of goray who find every excuse to defend stuff that should be condemned. This stuff doesn't help progression one bit.

[tonyhp32]

Dalsingh101

So are Tarkhans with their seperate 'Ramgarhia' Gurdwaras and so are Chamars with their 'gurus' and removal of Guru Granth Sahib. There are idiots in every caste. From foolish Jats thinking that without them Sikhi couldn't have survived to Mazabhis claiming that they would have had the same power as Jats if their leader hadn't been murdered. Both theories are based more on claims of caste superiority and prowess rather than history.

Look at the facts as outlined in my previous post. The event as propogated by Dalit writers is full of holes.

[dalsingh101]

I hear you, but you have to admit casteism in a big block of the panth that forms a majority, will add its flavour to Sikhi.

Thing is we never get past a sort of defensiveness on one side by pointing out flaws from another quarter. We can play that game forever.

Meanwhile, this nikkhi quom gets blown about in the wind by other forces.

Something dodgy happened with caste in the panth from the mid to late 1700s. Jatts were quite heavily involved in this. This isn't an attack on you.

If there is some truth in consistent and conscious jatt hegemony of certain Sikh institutes (which is pretty much undeniable from what I see), it isn't surprising people form alternative platforms. Condemn this by all means, but also condemn the underlying causes as well.

[chatanga1]

This story was mainly perpetuated by a writer (i forget his name) in the magazine Des Punjab in the late 90s. The story fails on many levels. Firstly Charat Singh was a Misldar in the Gujranwala area whilst Ala Singh was Raja of Patiala. Charhat Singh never had any territory beyond the Beas and Ala Singh had no territory north of the Satluj. As it seems that the main reason for doing away with Bir Singh seems to be the latter's opposition to Misladar taking personal power, Ala Singh would never have been bothered about anyones opposition to his rule. He used the Khalsa when it suited him and he betrayed them when it was in his interests to do so. The names of Ala Singh and Charta Singh seem to have been chosen so as to give a tinge of a conspiracy at a very high level. If Charhat Singh and Ala Singh were busy killing Bir Singh's followers in the Durbar Sahib what were the other Misldars doing? Given that there was a great deal of mutual jealousy between Misldars, the enemies of both Charhat Singh and Ala Singh would have used the event especially of Sikhs murdering Sikhs in Durbar Sahib as a means to unseat them. Bir Singh could never have been in Peshawar at that time as it was under Afghan control although I do believe that a Misldar called Milkha Singh was active and quite successful against the Muslim tribes around Rawalpindi. It seems like a made up story to defame 'dem evil jats'

some very valid points made. This would have been too great an injustice (the killing of Bir Singh and his followers in Darbar Sahib) that it would have been so easily forgotten by Sikhs and non-Sikhs whereas other examples of "Mazbhi" bravery are well chronicled and remembered in Sikh history. This particular episode would have had far reaching consequences in these days never mind those days. If you were a Mazbhi would you fight under those who had killed so many your people? Its unlikely that any person would, Mazbhi or not. Mazbhi Sikhan di Itihaas makes no recollection of any event.

I was quite unsure what to make of this, but feel now that it is just too fanciful to be true.

Other issue on the same lines is that put forward by Ramgarhias, that Sardar Jassa Singh was thrown out of Panth becuase the other Misls were jealous/afraid of his power, whereas the issue was over the murder of a female child. But even this was a Jat misl in origin ( Misl Sangnian).

[Mithar]

Dalsingh101

So are Tarkhans with their seperate 'Ramgarhia' Gurdwaras and so are Chamars with their 'gurus' and removal of Guru Granth Sahib. There are idiots in every caste. From foolish Jats thinking that without them Sikhi couldn't have survived to Mazabhis claiming that they would have had the same power as Jats if their leader hadn't been murdered. Both theories are based more on claims of caste superiority and prowess rather than history.

Look at the facts as outlined in my previous post. The event as propogated by Dalit writers is full of holes.

As always, Tony Jee has done a brilliant job in exposing anti-Sikh lies. We as Sikhs need to be fully aware propaganda from various groups out there who are trying to change Sikh history to further their political agenda. We are all aware of RSS-Hindu, Islamic, Christian, Communists attempting to change Sikh history, but very few are aware of the Dalit propaganda which is trying to change Sikh history. We usually like to keep quiet and even be in denial when it comes to Dalit propaganda since Dalits are also victims of the Brahminical order as the Sikhs are. But being a victim does not give anyone the right to change and distort history.

[dalsingh101]

And there we go, never admitting to casteism by Sikhs, blame Brahmins, or anything else.

[chatanga1]

And there we go, never admitting to casteism by Sikhs, ...

i would be surprised if any sikh were to never admit this. even the most ardent jatts i know (my relatives) admit that their past behaviour has turned the dalits against us.

[Mithar]

And there we go, never admitting to casteism by Sikhs, blame Brahmins, or anything else.

No one is saying caste is not a problem in the Panth. We all know it is. But I'll never understand why opposing all other propaganda by various groups is considered okay by most, yet why is it very politically incorrect to even say a word of opposition against Dalit propaganda which distorts Sikh history? This is just like how many were acting very politically correct and would not even say a word against Kamlesh Ahir's (Kamlee Kalesh!) lies, distortions about Sikhism and Sikh history.

[Xylitol]

political correctness is a poison that drains the life out of truth causing it to lose its potency in the hobbled minds of the politically correct

[dalsingh101]

No one is saying caste is not a problem in the Panth. We all know it is. But I'll never understand why opposing all other propaganda by various groups is considered okay by most, yet why is it very politically incorrect to even say a word of opposition against Dalit propaganda which distorts Sikh history? This is just like how many were acting very politically correct and would not even say a word against Kamlesh Ahir's (Kamlee Kalesh!) lies, distortions about Sikhism and Sikh history.

Okay, but there may be a strand of truth in the dalit version that we have to acknowledge. Some, hitherto, unmentioned things happened around the mid to late 1700s that seriously compromised the Sikhi principle of egalitarianism. We have managed to erase any mention of this in mainline history narratives. Whatever happened has effected the path to this day. Any even casual stroll through a pind will verify this. It does need to be resolved for the sake of cohesion in the panth.

As for Kamlee, I am personally of the mind that we shouldn't give oxygen to every ponking koota or kooti by reacting to them. Thankfully we are still pretty much in charge of the Sikh historical narrative (despite McLeodian attacks). Sikhs need to recognise real threats compared to people with big mouths who are better off ignored and will sink back into obscurity in no time. Instead we hype it up with angry reactions sometimes, giving such people attention, notoriety and then celebrity they would have never have got otherwise.

There is a distinct difference between combating flana timka and ensuring we realise the logical conclusion of this panth passed down to us. I see fairness and egalitarianism as a central plank of this 'teesra panth', the sooner we start to manifest this in reality, thee stronger our quom will become. Otherwise we'll just have to wait until we are attacked or facing annihilation again to realise this.

Edited May 25, 2010 by dalsingh101

[Guest zulu]

Dalsingh101

So are Tarkhans with their seperate 'Ramgarhia' Gurdwaras and so are Chamars with their 'gurus' and removal of Guru Granth Sahib. There are idiots in every caste. From foolish Jats thinking that without them Sikhi couldn't have survived to Mazabhis claiming that they would have had the same power as Jats if their leader hadn't been murdered. Both theories are based more on claims of caste superiority and prowess rather than history.

Look at the facts as outlined in my previous post. The event as propogated by Dalit writers is full of holes.

Ramgarhia Gurdwara?

dude do you even know how that started? I don't think you do...if you do then I would be impressed.

Sure it can be said its wrong to say ramgarhia gurdwara and only allow ramghareh into the committees BUT if you have elders in your family from Kenya(I doubt you do) but ask them how it started up....

[raagiwannabe]

^why dont you tell us zulu.

I would ask my dad but hes too busy having a glassy...

[dalsingh101]

^why dont you tell us zulu.

I would ask my dad but hes too busy having a glassy...

A bit early in the day for that isn't it? lol

[tonyhp32]

Nope don't have any duggus as relatives so please enlighten me.

[Mithar]

Okay, but may be a strand of truth in the dalit version that we have to acknowledge. Some, hitherto, unmentioned things happened around the mid to late 1700s that seriously compromised the Sikhi principle of egalitarianism. We have managed to erase any mention of this in mainline history narratives. Whatever happened has effected the path to this day. Any even casual stroll through a pind will verify this. It does need to be resolved for the sake of cohesion in the panth.

Nothing happened, and to think that something happened is just fanning the flames of Dalit conspiracy theories. The only thing that happened was that the first generation of Sikhs who lived during the times of Guru Gobind Singh Jee had slowly died off till in the mid 1700s their influence was almost to the minimal since there were so few left. After every succeeding generation, Sikhs began to get distanced from the ideals of the Khalsa and started to revert to Punjabi instincts of caste.

This even happened to the Muslims. Even Muslims say that the first generation of Muslims (Sahaba) were the purist of Muslims, then after every succeeding generation innovations and deviations began to creep in to the Islamic populations.

I really do sympathise with the plight of the Dalits and I hope one day with Guru Jee’s kirpa they will live in complete equality and harmony with Brahmins and other so called higher castes. But sympathy does not mean I will be a quiet spectator when the neo-Ambedkarites want to distort and mess around with the Sikh Panth’s history. Ambedkar was a great man, but the neo-Ambedkarites who claim to follow Ambedkar are diluting themselves with their tactics as Shiv Sena’s followers are when they claim that they are following the ideals of Shivaji.

[tonyhp32]

I think what Dalsingh101 is questioning is why were all the Misldars Jats or mainly Jats and how is it that no Mazhabi leader was able to set up his own rule similar to the way the other Misls did. One can disregard the same question for chamars as they did not take any great part in the Sikh struggle and only became Sikhs during the rule of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. The Mazhabis did take part in the Sikh struggle and so the question does have some merit. The main reason given in the history books is that the Mazhabis were associated with the Shaheedan Misl which did not take any territory and protected the Gurdwaras.

Edited April 21, 2010 by tonyhp32